Bolls films already have the built in audience of gamers so they will almost always make back the minimal amount of money that they take to make.
And even though Germany has changed the law so that only German production companies can make use of the tax shelter, because Boll is German he still can take advantage of it. And if the films lose money then they can still move tax losses to another year and therefore put off the losses until a future date when perhaps they will make some money through dvd sales or tv showings (and Boll movies do end up on tv eventually. I've seen House of the Dead, Alone in the Dark, and Bloodrayne all on tv at some point). Basically, giving Boll money is a very low risk investment. By giving him money you could make or lose money but if you don't then you know you will loose it to taxes.
Look up "German tax shelter" and you will find lots of articles talking about it.
That goes back to my original point that it would take a mountain of evidence for videogame ratings such as and including AO -- for violence -- to be government regulated. Until such a mountain exists then there will be no basis for treating violent videogames differently than violent films or even non-violent films.
If a game is rating AO for sex, then I would assume that existing local or state pornography laws would already apply so no need for a new law.
Those ratings are not enforced by the government. It is a voluntary system and as far as I know there isn't even a voluntary ratings system for radio.
There are, however, decency guidelines for programming broadcast over the public airwaves. These, as the name would suggest, are guidelines and not specific rules. Why are they guidelines rather than specific rules? Because the FCC feels that spelling out specific rules would be censorship.
It is a matter of semantics but the fact is the television ratings are voluntary
From the FCC's website
Did you know that the television industry has voluntary ratings for TV programs?
However, this law was not about obscenity was it? It was about ratings.
Moreover, there is no definition of obscenity but rather a test and as such things are declared obscene on a case by case basis.
Yes, the MPAA rules were set up to cut off government enforcement. However, so were the videogame ratings.
I fail to see what any of what you wrote indicates that I have a limited understanding of the situation. The situation as I see it is about government regulations of ratings and not obscenity. Nor is it about a genre such as pornography but rather a medium. Please feel free to correct me.
Yes but porn is a genre and not a medium. Those laws are on state or local levels. Sometimes it is something as vague as "material harmful to minors." It seems like at least once a year a comic book store will get busted for selling a comic book with depictions of sex or nudity in it to a minor but even in those cases it is often the case that the court has to determine if the comic book in question is "pornographic" or "harmful to minors."
I"m not a lawyer though so if someone who is an expert in this would like to chime in feel free to do so.
I've not read the text of the proposed law but unless it requires all games to be rated then the simple solution is to not submit a game for a rating. Of course, that would probably prevent most stores from carrying it.
When there are things like Steam, Gametap, X-Box live and other less legal online methods of game delivery, these types of laws are becoming increasingly meaningless anyway.
I'm not legal expert but I believe that showing that there was some sort of legitimate harm would overcome the first amendment.
Regardless, when people simply say that it is unconstitutional on first amendment grounds there are always those who are under the mistaken assumption that film ratings are government enforced and so this law and others like it would simply bring videogames into line with films. My perhaps poorly worded post was an attempt at cut off those kinds of posts.
Every time these stories about videogame laws come up someone asks what is wrong with having laws like this.
Here's the problem: In the USA no other medium has its ratings enforced by the government. Not the music industry, not the comic book industry, not the internet, not tv, and not the film industry. The MPAA ratings are self-enforced. If someone under 17 isn't allowed into an R-rated movie without an adult it is because the movie industry is inforcing those rules, not the government.
Therefore, if the videogame industry were to be singled out as the only medium to have its ratings enforced by the government there would have to be a mountain of evidence suggesting that violent videogames were harmful to minors. No such mountain exists. As such, these laws are misguided at best and hollow attempts on the part of politicians to appear "pro-family" at worst.
The last IU pres didn't get fired, he retired....which was announced right in the middle of a controversy over failing to find a new provost (I think that was the position) when everyone wanted the dean to get it and then the dean left to be president of another school. But the decision to retire wasn't related at all...
IU's guides could be asked to locate a building on campus", (use a campus map)
IU's campus is fairly big and there are some minor buildings that aren't even on the map. I have showed my students on a map where our department building is and still had them call me on their cell phone when they got lost coming to see me there. (Of course last year they tore down all the buildings around ours which made it easier to find -- if you could find your way through the maze of construction fences.) But I agree, that is a pretty dumb example. They should just make the map better.
"find a book in one of the university's libraries" (use a library web page)or
I am assuming that he meant help on searching for a book that covers a topic rather than where a book is physically located (although there are something like 6 libraries on campus so maybe he is just really concerned about getting directions?).
Regardless, the IU library already offers instant messaging or chat with a librarian so I can only assume that the Chacha deal is just an extension of this.
"solve a question about Windows Vista (use Microsoft s knowledge base)".
This is another situation where I'm assuming it would be about IU specific settings or even things like viruses or network outages. However, IU already has a really good knowledge base as well as tech support chat so I would assume that the ChaCha deal is, again, just an extension of that.
IU is really trying to be seen as a high tech school. Two years ago they were named the university with the best wireless (which of course doesn't exist in our department's building...) and they have a fairly highly ranked supercomputer. I would assume this is part of some attempt to make IU seem Web2.0 or something.
We aren't "forced" to use it but we can download Office for "free" and Vista Business costs $15 and Ultimate cost something like $20 or $25 at the bookstore.
I'm certain that Microsoft doesn't give IU faculty and students such a discount purely out of love. I would be willing to bet that we pay for it in one way or another.
By the time most people graduate they have been getting MS products legally for free or very cheap for so long they haven't tried anything else and just automatically keep using MS products.
The only reason why IU is interested in ChaCha is because it was started by Scott A. Jones who is an IU grad (and also the founder of Gracenote).
The thought of making library and tech support people essentially chacha employees is a bit disturbing but students and faculty have been able to contact them through chat and instant messenger so perhaps it won't really make any difference as long as only IU people can contact them.
However, if I recall correctly it does not put the option to save as an odf file in the "save as..." dialog but rather in a separate section. (screenshots of the converter are here)
Sun has their own ODF filter which makes ODF just another option in the save as dialog but according to that post there are some issues with Office 2007 reading ODF.
Of course they settle because those stupid coupons don't cost them anything. If this class-action lawsuit is settled the people in it will probably get a $10 coupon for the itunes store or something and the lawyers -- on both sides -- will get hundreds of thousands of dollars. They are the only ones who benefit.
That's the Saturday lineup. This is going to be on Sunday. I made that mistake at first too. Unfortunately my local affiliate still isn't showing it. Oh well. I'm sure someone will put it online somewhere if I really want to see it.
I just looked at the guide for my local CBS station. You know what it has on at noon? Infomercials. Apparently they think they can make more money showing infomercials than videogaming...
absolutely. The only game in years for which I've paid full price is Half-Life 2. I have more than enough older games to play that I will wait until they get down to $19.95 or less.
While I want some motivation or rational for things, if stories are going to be told through cut scenes then count me out. As far as I'm concerned most cut scenes are just lame cop-outs for games that either can't figure out a way to tell the story without them or have limitations in their game engine that prevent the player from doing it themselves and so they have to make a cut scene to show the character to something.
If that is how stories are going to be told in FPS then leave them out or at least make them skipable.
I don't remember much of anything about the story of Deus Ex.
I've played the original Half-Life all the way through at least 2 times but it wasn't because of the story. I replayed it not because it is a great story but because it is fun to play. What exactly is the story in Half-Life? Aliens are invading. The government is trying to kill everyone to cover it up.
Arguing if games are art is like arguing if Star Wars is a western. No matter what people have made up their minds and no one will change them regardless of how persuasive the argument. And, in the end, it doesn't really matter since they are terms that only matter if you want them to matter.
I don't care if something is art or not. I don't care if Star Wars is a Western or not. All I care about is if I like them and find them worthwhile or not. The terms you apply to them won't change that.
Slashdot Mirror
They have multiple income streams. As noted in the interview, Opera, like Firefox, makes money from google and other search engines.
And, as the browser for the Wii and the DS, I'm sure that Nintendo is giving them a nice amount of money.
Bolls films already have the built in audience of gamers so they will almost always make back the minimal amount of money that they take to make.
And even though Germany has changed the law so that only German production companies can make use of the tax shelter, because Boll is German he still can take advantage of it. And if the films lose money then they can still move tax losses to another year and therefore put off the losses until a future date when perhaps they will make some money through dvd sales or tv showings (and Boll movies do end up on tv eventually. I've seen House of the Dead, Alone in the Dark, and Bloodrayne all on tv at some point).
Basically, giving Boll money is a very low risk investment. By giving him money you could make or lose money but if you don't then you know you will loose it to taxes.
Look up "German tax shelter" and you will find lots of articles talking about it.
http://www.slate.com/id/2117309
That goes back to my original point that it would take a mountain of evidence for videogame ratings such as and including AO -- for violence -- to be government regulated. Until such a mountain exists then there will be no basis for treating violent videogames differently than violent films or even non-violent films.
If a game is rating AO for sex, then I would assume that existing local or state pornography laws would already apply so no need for a new law.
There are, however, decency guidelines for programming broadcast over the public airwaves. These, as the name would suggest, are guidelines and not specific rules. Why are they guidelines rather than specific rules? Because the FCC feels that spelling out specific rules would be censorship.
It is a matter of semantics but the fact is the television ratings are voluntary
From the FCC's website
However, this law was not about obscenity was it? It was about ratings.
Moreover, there is no definition of obscenity but rather a test and as such things are declared obscene on a case by case basis.
Yes, the MPAA rules were set up to cut off government enforcement. However, so were the videogame ratings.
I fail to see what any of what you wrote indicates that I have a limited understanding of the situation. The situation as I see it is about government regulations of ratings and not obscenity. Nor is it about a genre such as pornography but rather a medium. Please feel free to correct me.
Yes but porn is a genre and not a medium. Those laws are on state or local levels. Sometimes it is something as vague as "material harmful to minors." It seems like at least once a year a comic book store will get busted for selling a comic book with depictions of sex or nudity in it to a minor but even in those cases it is often the case that the court has to determine if the comic book in question is "pornographic" or "harmful to minors."
I"m not a lawyer though so if someone who is an expert in this would like to chime in feel free to do so.
I've not read the text of the proposed law but unless it requires all games to be rated then the simple solution is to not submit a game for a rating. Of course, that would probably prevent most stores from carrying it.
When there are things like Steam, Gametap, X-Box live and other less legal online methods of game delivery, these types of laws are becoming increasingly meaningless anyway.
I'm not legal expert but I believe that showing that there was some sort of legitimate harm would overcome the first amendment.
Regardless, when people simply say that it is unconstitutional on first amendment grounds there are always those who are under the mistaken assumption that film ratings are government enforced and so this law and others like it would simply bring videogames into line with films. My perhaps poorly worded post was an attempt at cut off those kinds of posts.
Every time these stories about videogame laws come up someone asks what is wrong with having laws like this.
Here's the problem:
In the USA no other medium has its ratings enforced by the government. Not the music industry, not the comic book industry, not the internet, not tv, and not the film industry. The MPAA ratings are self-enforced. If someone under 17 isn't allowed into an R-rated movie without an adult it is because the movie industry is inforcing those rules, not the government.
Therefore, if the videogame industry were to be singled out as the only medium to have its ratings enforced by the government there would have to be a mountain of evidence suggesting that violent videogames were harmful to minors. No such mountain exists. As such, these laws are misguided at best and hollow attempts on the part of politicians to appear "pro-family" at worst.
The last IU pres didn't get fired, he retired. ...which was announced right in the middle of a controversy over failing to find a new provost (I think that was the position) when everyone wanted the dean to get it and then the dean left to be president of another school. But the decision to retire wasn't related at all...
IU is really trying to be seen as a high tech school. Two years ago they were named the university with the best wireless (which of course doesn't exist in our department's building...) and they have a fairly highly ranked supercomputer. I would assume this is part of some attempt to make IU seem Web2.0 or something.
We aren't "forced" to use it but we can download Office for "free" and Vista Business costs $15 and Ultimate cost something like $20 or $25 at the bookstore.
I'm certain that Microsoft doesn't give IU faculty and students such a discount purely out of love. I would be willing to bet that we pay for it in one way or another.
By the time most people graduate they have been getting MS products legally for free or very cheap for so long they haven't tried anything else and just automatically keep using MS products.
The only reason why IU is interested in ChaCha is because it was started by Scott A. Jones who is an IU grad (and also the founder of Gracenote).
The thought of making library and tech support people essentially chacha employees is a bit disturbing but students and faculty have been able to contact them through chat and instant messenger so perhaps it won't really make any difference as long as only IU people can contact them.
Yahoo was a directory, like a yellow pages. Chacha is search combined with chat. If you can't find something you will talk to a real person.
There is a video of her outing on youtube.
Him? you might want to actually read the article next time...
There is NOT support for ODF built into Office 2007. Microsoft started an open-source project to add that to Office 2007
However, if I recall correctly it does not put the option to save as an odf file in the "save as..." dialog but rather in a separate section. (screenshots of the converter are here)
Sun has their own ODF filter which makes ODF just another option in the save as dialog but according to that post there are some issues with Office 2007 reading ODF.
Of course they settle because those stupid coupons don't cost them anything. If this class-action lawsuit is settled the people in it will probably get a $10 coupon for the itunes store or something and the lawyers -- on both sides -- will get hundreds of thousands of dollars. They are the only ones who benefit.
That's the Saturday lineup. This is going to be on Sunday. I made that mistake at first too. Unfortunately my local affiliate still isn't showing it. Oh well. I'm sure someone will put it online somewhere if I really want to see it.
I just looked at the guide for my local CBS station. You know what it has on at noon? Infomercials. Apparently they think they can make more money showing infomercials than videogaming...
absolutely. The only game in years for which I've paid full price is Half-Life 2. I have more than enough older games to play that I will wait until they get down to $19.95 or less.
While I want some motivation or rational for things, if stories are going to be told through cut scenes then count me out. As far as I'm concerned most cut scenes are just lame cop-outs for games that either can't figure out a way to tell the story without them or have limitations in their game engine that prevent the player from doing it themselves and so they have to make a cut scene to show the character to something.
If that is how stories are going to be told in FPS then leave them out or at least make them skipable.
I don't remember much of anything about the story of Deus Ex.
I've played the original Half-Life all the way through at least 2 times but it wasn't because of the story. I replayed it not because it is a great story but because it is fun to play. What exactly is the story in Half-Life? Aliens are invading. The government is trying to kill everyone to cover it up.
Arguing if games are art is like arguing if Star Wars is a western. No matter what people have made up their minds and no one will change them regardless of how persuasive the argument. And, in the end, it doesn't really matter since they are terms that only matter if you want them to matter.
I don't care if something is art or not. I don't care if Star Wars is a Western or not. All I care about is if I like them and find them worthwhile or not. The terms you apply to them won't change that.